Section 1: The Topic
In the US, the CDC recommends children aged 0 to six years to get 29 doses of 9 vaccines and the additional flu shot years after the sixth month. Vaccines have been scientifically proven to be beneficial as the first line of defense for most preventable diseases. However, vaccinations programs have been received with mixed levels of concerns. According to Miller (2015), the collapse of the whooping cough immunizations programme in the UK in the 1970s, and the 1990s safety scare concerning MMR vaccines contributed to significant drops in compliance. The whooping cough vaccine was alleged to cause brain damage, while the MMR vaccine combination was linked to autism. Despite improved efficiency in demonstrating the efficacy and safety of vaccines, significant proportions of the population in the US and worldwide have reservations and are vaccination hesitant. However, benefits of vaccines have been shown to outweigh adverse effects, an understanding that has prompted proponents of vaccination into calls for the process to be made compulsory (Miller, 2015). In the US, vaccination is not mandated by law, but all the 50 states require children joining the public school to receive certain vaccinations. There are medical and religious exemptions in some states and philosophical exemptions in others. Considering the lack of consensus and an understanding of the benefits of vaccinations, making the process compulsory by law is perceived as the best strategy for improving compliance and addressing the problem of vaccine hesitancy or refusal.
Section 2: The Controversy
In the US, the controversial debate on the enduring values of public health, individual choice, and parental rights was reignited following the outbreak of measles in 2014 (Gostin, 2015; Randall, 2015). The outbreak was the first after the declaration of the eradication of measles and rubella in 2000 and 2004 respectively. Proponents of vaccination assert that the process is fate and represents the greatest health development of the 20th century. Millions of lives have been saved through vaccination. On the other hand, opponents of vaccinations argue that bodies of children have immune systems that can deal sufficiently with infections without the need to introduce questionable vaccine ingredients with potentially harmful side effects. Compulsory vaccination targets the latter group and is based on the legomedical ideology that unvaccinated individuals are a public health risk, hence the need to exercise power against their will to prevent harm to others. Consequently, solutions for vaccination coercion have been established (Patryn and Zagaja, 2016).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Pro Side of the Controversy
Gostin (2015) observed that the 2014 measles outbreak comprised mainly of unvaccinated cases and those with unknown status, thus justifying the argument of such statues being a public health risk. The observations corroborate an extensive body of research evidence on the effectiveness of vaccines in preventing diseases. Questions on the transparency of research, efficacy, and safety (Miller, 2015) have also been addressed through evidence showing that ingredients in vaccines are safe in the doses administered. In addition, adverse reactions to vaccines are extremely rare. Controversial papers published arguing about the potential of vaccines to cause harm, have since been discredited with scientific evidence. Vaccines are also known to protect the herd, by boosting the immunity of large population segments. In so doing, future generations are protected, especially from diseases such as smallpox and polio that have been eradicated in the US. The programmes are further justified by the presence of vaccine-preventable diseases, whose health and economic burdens can be addressed effectively through vaccination. Therefore, the benefits of vaccinations outweigh potential side effects, hence compulsory vaccination is necessary to improve compliance and address the problem of hesitancy.
Con Side of the Controversy
Laws and policies exempting individuals from vaccination based on medical reasons are understandable, but those on religious and philosophical reasons largely depend on civil rights, the right to freedom of choice in particular (Randall, 2016). Perceptions that hesitancy or refusal to be vaccinated is an individual right are informed by a number of reasons. Concerns about the efficacy and safety of vaccines have not been addressed conclusively. According to the CDC, all vaccines have the risk of life-threatening allergic reaction. Concerns are justified by evidence of vaccine research companies operating covertly and maintaining their trial results in secrecy. Opponents also advance the argument that compulsory vaccination constitutes government involvement in personal medical choices, hence in violation of individual rights. The practice also infringes on constitutionally protected freedoms. Moreover, most diseases targeted by vaccines no longer exist and those that do are virtually harmless and can be handled by the body’s natural immunity.
Section 3: Tentative Thesis Statement
Compulsory vaccination is a necessary public health policy for improving compliance whose implementation should address reservations held by opponents in order to eliminate conflict on infringement of personal medical choice and other constitutionally protected freedoms.
References
Gostin, L. O. (2015). Law, ethics, and public health in the vaccination debates: politics of the measles outbreak. Jama , 313 (11), 1099-1100.
Miller, E. (2015). Controversies and challenges of vaccination: an interview with Elizabeth Miller. BMC Medicine , 13 (1), 267.
Patryn, R. K., & Zagaja, A. (2016). Vaccinations—Between free will and coercion. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics , 12 (8), 2204-2205.
Randall, K. (2015). Kansas, please protect our children: why Kansas should remove the religious exemption for mandatory school vaccinations. U. Kan. L. Rev. , 64 , 1217.
